tv Newsmakers CSPAN July 14, 2013 10:00am-10:31am EDT
judiciary chair bob goodlatte nd james comey at his confirmation hearing. later, the privacy and civil oversight board on n.s.a. surveillance programs. capitol hill from is the chair of the house udiciary committee republican of virginia. thanks for being with us. >> glad to be with you. here is alan gomez of "u.s.a. and " the immigration beat steve covers capitol hill for the washington times. we begin with immigration and you in your caucus is there significant republican support with both border security and issue of illegals in this country right now? are they major areas needed for immigration reform. border ealing with security enforcement and
enforcement in the interior of the country. reforming our legal immigration system so we can reate a healthier economy and create more american jobs by keeping people here who are educated in our great universities. we don't want them to go back ome in the science, technology and engineering fields and work for companies that compete with us. e want them to stay here and grow our economy. and it is also important that we is the the issue of what appropriate legal status for the who llion or more people are not here lawfully today. think it is something that republicans are looking at very closely. we had a very important meeting this week and the result of that, i think, believe that we can continue to move forward in step-by-step approach we are taking to address all three major areas including the status.iate legal congressman eric cantor and i
nnounced we are working on legislation that will deal with the issue of children who are by their parents unlawfully and yet have grown up here, sometimes from a very early age, educated here and now and face to go out life on their own and don't have any documentation. important at is an area to address and there are many republicans who want to do that. step would be to figure out for the larger group. be don't all have to treated with the same status. somebody who entered the country 10 days ago may not be deserving of the same consideration as somebody who country 20 years ago. people who came here and have legalize pting to their status may opinion different status than those who simply by egally coming across the border. hey all need to be addressed but we have to think of it not as one large group of 11 million
a lot of individuals who fit in different categories. gomez.ill turn to alan >> mr. chairman, you have been ery clear that those young undocumented immigrants, those rought here when children need toed treated differently. this week after the meeting many the same thing, they came through no fault of see a wn and they would different route toward citizenship or be treat the differently. i understande sure where you stand for the rest of them. you said several times that you a special pathway to citizenship for those folks who illegally. but if all the other conditions re met, they pass a criminal background check, adequate border security and they do not ump ahead in line of anybody else, if they have to go to the back and wait for everybody else you see ed legally, do a possibility for them being able to eventually apply for
citizen? >> the objection to the senate bill, the number one objection -- they have a long pathway to citizenship but they give a legal status about of of the things that we have in our house bills and them in their of senate bills such as securing the border, better interior enforce. involving state and local law nforcement, having an e-verify system that is mandatory and works. visa systemtry-exit so we know if people have left. from members about that. with regard to the legal status, i think that i and other members open-minded to the idea that to come ld have a way be able e shadows, to to work, to have their own taxes, ses, to pay their to travel back and forth to their home country and
elsewhere. but, having a special pathway to citizenship like the senate bill where people who have immigrated lawfully to the ountry for generations and sometimes wait in line for 10 ears or more based upon employment based petitions, amily based petitions, refugee status, to create a new category illegally who came in doesn't sit well with a great any americans and that we are concerned about. if we can find that middle ground where we are going to see enforcement take place first and we will see the legal this is on reform necessary not just for high skilled areas but areas like where there is a shortage of u.s. workers, then find that appropriate legal we are all about looking for it. we are doing a step-by-step the house. not only does that allow us to look at each aspect of
came -- n reform carefully. the senate had one hearing on the gang of eight before it was senate.to the this is a bill that i hear differing numbers on the pages least 1,200 pages long. to hold one hearing on that i is going to lead a lot of people to conclude some of the consequences d that have emanated from the will care legislation beset that legislation. holding hearings, marking up bills, five different ills now between the judiciary committee and homeland security committee assures us of getting, think, better results. then taking each next step. hold a step is to hearing later there month on the issue of children who are here in early age by their parents and that is our
next step. we understand, we recognize there is more to be addressed all ur goal is to address of these three main areas, nforcement, legal immigration reform and the issue of the legal status of people who are lawful ly here. hat is what we are committed to. ly here.llow up, you mentioned that is what we are committed to. >> to follow up, you mentioned the idea folks who came when there should be an avenue for them to live here lawfully and work here but you referring to legal status. this is a question that you know very well that draws up quite a bit of unrest when it comes to folks pushing for this. one representative talked about visa forof a long-term those people so they can be here, work here but would have going home to their home country for some period of
time. that would main they could be a while but you are saying you have to go home for a little bit and do that repeatedly. is that a process, something that is workable given that some folks have been here 20, 30, 40 years? > we have encouraged the members of the judiciary committee and others and he is the author of the kills visa act that we have passed through the judiciary committee already. he has ideas and we welcomed him develop those ideas. but for people who have come to finding ry unlawfully, a legal status for them is something that is a worthwhile look at but having a special pathway to citizenship many ething that a great republicans including i have concerns about. we are working on that issue and thing clear in ny terms of what mr. issa described
you at i just described to or something that could come from another member. e are encouraging openness and ide ideas. none. bills thus far are written in and there are bills yet to be written and we are encouraging members to put their and do that ward but we are not making any decisions about the best way to that legal status at this point except to say that it houldn't be done before we are assured that we will not make the mistake of 1986 and have illegal ave of immigration that occurred that ing that, and to say it should not include a special has ay to citizenship that not been available to people who obey orked very hard to the law and follow the legal process. that do not mean that somebody gets a legal status -- and epending how we could do this -- one way would be to give them heal status and say you are
-- legal status and say you are lawfully here. you are not a citizen but you and if you l status have one of the ways others who basis on a temporary sometimes staying for many years finds to make that into a by marrying a s united states citizen, having an for aer petition for them job skill that is needed in the united states, having another them, all etition for of knows are ways they can eventually find themselves permanent residents and ultimately citizens. none of knows would be special ways that have been made only to people who becausee here illegally that is the senate's approach. we don't agree with this approach. we will turn to steven now. > you talked about the special pathway to citizenship and there is a division between senate house cans and republicans on this issue.
senate republicans voted for the bill and of the others who didn't most of them still ay we believe there will eventually be a pathway to citizenship and not only of them say t most that is actually a good idea. they are haggling over the criteria to get there. that is by far not a unanimous the house among house republicans. what are you seeing that is different? is it a different political you have for your sit si? constituency? what is driving you in a different direction than the senate republicans? talked to a great many of the senators on the republican side some of whom but for the legislation 70% of the senators on the against n side voted the bill. i think you would find a higher house republicans voting against that senate bill. all looking for ways to not say we want to kill the
immigration process, kill the bill, which is what happened in 2007. what we are saying is we want to way. a better we are listening to senators about the differing ideas they have. that in my you private conversations with them many of them as they hear with doing in the house like our approach better and they are this aging us to continue step-by-step careful analysis we go lding consensus as forward approach. i think that is what we will continue to do. part of that process is making sure we get the policy right but art of it is also of course making sure that for republicans in the house we get the politics right as well. of the house are up for re-election every two years and and have to go back home justify themselves to their instances s in many more immediately than senators next f whom are up in the cycle but most not up for additional years.
so, it will be a different and it willhe house be a process of building that ence in legislation solves these problems and doesn't repeat the mistakes of 1986, doesn't ignore the pportunity for legal immigration reform to grow our economy and create american jocks, -- jobs and doesn't say is a problem just at the border but it is a problem when 40% entered lawfully but overstayed their visas. some effectively permanently visas.ying the the 11 million, four million or entered lawfully and are now here illegally so the board -- border fix doesn't fix that. a lot of senators on the republican side recognize that and like the careful analysis further look at these things that are taking place in the
ouse and we are going to continue down that path. >> i want to ask you about president obama. two different questions about his role. first is, he's apparently played big role, not necessarily public but a fairly ig role in the senate bill negotiations. what sort of help or hindrance an he be as the house tackles its bill? this the thing where your advice is to stay out of the negotiations or he can play a role in helping you sort out of the stuff? econd, we have seen with his deferred action for childhood arrival policy says they won't deported. we have seen he is willing to laterallunilaterally. in some ways it seems he has a cards in this like if you on't pass a bill this year, immigration advocates expect him to issue a more blanket policy
the vast majority of the 11 million folks here illegally now. doesn't he essentially have that final card to create what would amnesty if you don't come up with a solution? >> to the first question, we in around the d people country know where the president stands on immigration reform. as ound it very disturbing the negotiations were going on --private lined closed doors behind closed doors in the senate he had his staff people n the room as part of the negotiations. but we also recognize that the can play a anch useful role in providing technical advice. the e have met with on ident's lead advisors this issue from time to time during the last six months to them know what we are doing to hear from them concerns they have. we have welcomed them to offer their input in the process.
ut we think that if the president tries to drive this issue either by threatening to described or by trying to jam something down the of the american people and their representatives in the house that they do not want, will have a negative impact on the process and will not where we needt to to in terms of trying to solve broken lem of our immigration system. for example, when we talk about somebody i o rubio admi dmire greatly i don't agree with his bill and there are things he would like to change we haveree when he says de facto amnesty and we have a ack of enforcement of our laws today and we are missing a great opportunity to grow our economy immigration al programs that work to help create economic growth. president's to the actions for the children who
illegally by ere their parents that he is doing prosecution, that kind of discretion was clearly written into the law to handle basis.-by-case when he starts using it for hundreds of thousands of people building doing is tremendous mistrust. a saw that in a bill passed few weeks ago in the house all but six republicans voted to cut to the funding to allow that be done. why? because that is the prerogative f the congress, not the president. while we can find and look for common ground about what to do people, those children who are brought here, the he tries to say that executive has the authority to do things that are khaerl set set forth aslearly the prerogative of the congress he is inviting both problems for his administration and he's inviting disaster for the effort to bring about immigration
reform. it is important that the his dent make clear position on the issues, but if he tries to muscle this process disrupt the natural order of balances and division f power between three branchlebranches of the federal government he is that will to an area not serve him well or the making of public policy well. it is not just in this area. he came about of the congress the union te of address last year and sort of alluded to it again this year. last year he was clear, he had a laundry list of things he wanted said ngress to do and he if you don't do it i will. that is not democracy. representative government. and that is not where any president of the united states very be and i would clearly warn him if he follows that avenue or threatens that this process with regard to immigration reform he
of blowing the whole thing up. >> let me follow one a specific action.deferred the senate national labor relations board situation in the mcconnell led republicans to join a lawsuit protest i president's he appointments on that issue. try you considered suing to to stop deferred action? i know there is a lawsuit in .exas federal court have you considered getting legally involved to take that halt that policy? >> we are watching closely that court case in texas. a very interesting case. the labor union that represents the way, we talk about the enforcement at our borders. now throws ill 40,000 people at that. and $46 billion. leads a lot of to us think that is not the right solution nor would it ever actually it didn't build confidence in the house that
that was added to the senate bill at the end. that as it may, the fact that immigration and customs enforcement agents for country of of this more than three million square miles and 300 million people and we know once you enter the overstay legally or the visa, those millions are in country, to f the have the president actually prohibit them from enforcing the caused them to bring a lawsuit in federal court saying the was a violation of constitution and of the laws of the land. we are waiting to see how that forward.n goes but we are always obviously watching other areas and there in been lawsuits brought other areas beyond the nlrb case. chesapeake bay executive order is in federal ourt because a number of organizations from the american farm bureau to the national
association of home builders and others have challenged that as saying he exceeded executive branch authority. we needs to always be exercising the opportunity to take action in court. watching what is going -- we are watching what is going on in that case in texas. we will continue to monitor and look at all of our options moving forward. on this, we heard from former president bush who action or benevolent with respect to illegals. congress more han two decades and in the chair dealing with immigration, s this the most challenging situation you have dealt with? >> when you are chairman and at a lot of decisions regarding the issue it is an important responsibility. major, major challenge. but i have been involved with president ment of a of the united states,
impeachment of federal judges, the complicated issues, ftermath of 9/11 and economic calamity if you will in 2008 and beyond beyond. quite frankly, i think the biggest issue facing our country continuing to run trillion dollar deficits year year and while it will dip a little bit there year because increase which i didn't support and sequestration two-thirds of andatory spending, fad -- food stamps tripling in 10 years, if -- n't get criminal control of what has gone from ne-third to two-thirds of our budget is the greatest challenge. i'm not at the center of those the judiciary ay committee has control over
constitution the and i have felt a long time that we should have a constitutional limiting the ability of the federal government to borrow money requiring the its budgetto balance except in times of national emergency. most important issue in my opinion facing our government. immigration reform is a major judiciary efore the committee and i'm excited about the opportunity to work on this. when the democrats were in the committee and in the house and in the senate and for his dent obama first two years, they did nothing about immigration reform. i'm pleased that we are working on it and pleased that we are in the house an senate. we don't like the way the senate has done it and we will do it differently. >> i want to go back to border security. border ioned the senate security plan. 6 billion dollars, double the
size of the patrol to 40,000 agents. that was a republican brokered the senate. that was their way of pacifying that.icans to vote for in your chamber very different approach thus far. chairman of homeland -- competentrtment -- is pushing a bill to require the department of homeland security to go first figure out what is going on at the border, measure it, figure out ways to measure what is going on and devise a plan. a r committee is looking at bill to empower state and local police officers to help enforce immigration law. so wondering if the focus of many republicans is making sure the border is locked down. have to ctions do you that senate bill that seemed to and y many in the senate
slower and deliberate approach in the house when so many say it is such an concern? >> we did immigration reform in 986 and we are still living with the mistakes of that nearly 30 years ago. solve the ly need to problem. but we need to get it right. that should be our timetable. it right.e we get we didn't get it right last time. the senate didn't get it right 2007 when the effort collapsed when the public became the of the things in senate bill. our main concern with the senate with regard to the border they make an evident, we don't think it is the right they say we are going to do that after we grant legal people o 11 million presentunlawfully present.
that is not and i will objective but there are hundreds of millions that to the unitedcome states and if we don't have the border secure and don't have the interior enforcement an e-verify to make sure we don't have nother wave of illegal immigration we will repeat the mistakes of 1986. we don't want to do that and we think the senate has. hat is why we are taking a different approaching careful proce proceeding deliberately. been working on this thoroughly throughout the entire ix months and we think we have produced great legislation and it could be made better. it step by aking step and i think that is the way like erican people would legislation of all kinds to be much time asput as members of the house have put studying ng up and each of the bills we have moved thus far and we've got more to
do. bob goodlatte is the chair of the how judiciary committee. with us on r being "news makers program." steven dinan.h what are the chances the house will pass comprehensive year?ation reform this >> i guess it depends on what your definition of comprehensive is. if that means a bill that has a broad pathway to citizenship for majority of 11 million which is what the advocacy groups have defined, i think the chances are very slim the house passes that. if you are talking about a bill a, either a single bill or group of bills that includes legal status for, he the congressman said for t youth and possibly legal status million est of the 11 and deals with the other two
lanks, enforcement and the legal immigration system, i think it is possible. maybe 50-50 that -- for whatever that is worth -- that the house gets that done. the bigger question is whether and senate can come to an agreement if that does happen and there i would say the a very slim part. house debate between the and senate with the republicans? -- i think he is right when he says the ifficulty will be when the house -- whatever the house passes, when they get with the senate, what that negotiation like.e we were speaking with republicans this week and their even if they pass two or three bills, something for the young kids, something on security, e-verify and send it to conference with the senate, they are paranoid about back from that. those thingsall of together i think 50-50 is very
generous. looking at the reality that you have senator schumer and who pushed it in the senate saying any bill that doesn't have that broader athway to citizenship for the vast majority of undocumented immigrants is a nonstarter on on the house side you have them saying ok, keep it for the young kids but else is this nebulous legal status that says they yet, we iled a bill have heard them theorize. polar u start at such opposite on such a core issue, it makes it difficult. >> i mentioned president bush failed with immigration reform in 2006 and 2007. if that happens under president again what impact does that have for the rest of his second term? i don't know that immigration is the make or break. think we are seek some slide in his legislative heft. president bush's second was
laying defense on the war on terror against efforts from congress. of president obama's second term will be defending the first term priority of health care. immigration he would love to get it done but there is a lot on his plate with just defending care.h i don't know how far he will go. you mentioned president bush. we could well be looking at is the situation in worth remembering. passed a e senate brought bill. the house passed and enforcement and they didn't bother to go to conference because they were so different. >> gentlemen, thank you both for us on c-span. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] c-span the kweurpblation